When shooting for HD final output, how high of an ISO do you comfortably go on the 5D3 and the 6D? Now in a situation where you could really use the shot and it is dark, are you willing to go higher for that one moment?

Now in a situation where you could really use the shot and it is dark, are you willing to go higher for that one moment?

Why would you not if you need the shot? I"d crank it up as high as needed and if necessary use neatvideo or else just use a light on camera, Taky's video is a good example where just a tiny bit of light (using a videolight with a dimmer) on camera would have made much difference. Very high iso is not always a substitute for real light.

I respectfully disagree. You are right in general the advantage of full frame over cropped sensor. However 5d3 and 6d has superior high ISO performance because it was built in to the camera noise reduction engine. 5D mark 2 is full frame but it can't deliver clean usable high ISO footage after ISO 2400 IMO. Nowhere near what 5D3 and 6D capable of in low light.

the newer canon 70D is cropped sensor DSLR. Its high iso Performance has greatly improved compared to 60D or 7D.

My video has no camera light attached to the camera, it was just dark.

I know that because it was very obvious there was no light on the camera, that's why I said just a little bit of extra light would have made a big difference in such a situation. Even at 12800 iso some of those shots seem way too dark to me.

I respectfully disagree. You are right in general the advantage of full frame over cropped sensor. However 5d3 and 6d has superior high ISO performance because it was built in to the camera noise reduction engine. 5D mark 2 is full frame but it can't deliver clean usable high ISO footage after ISO 2400 IMO. Nowhere near what 5D3 and 6D capable of in low light.

the newer canon 70D is cropped sensor DSLR. Its high iso Performance has greatly improved compared to 60D or 7D.

ISO performance of 70D compare to 60d is no use because they're both crop sensor.

My question to you is do you think 70D have a better ISO performance than 6D and 5D mark 3?

Because your original comment said that Full Frame has NOTHING to do with high ISO performance.

Full frame of course do better than cropped sensor. That's why I said I agreed with you on that in a general sense, but the fact 6D and 5D3 high ISO performance is superior is not because it is full frame. Just compare between 5D2 and 5D3. Both are full frame but the high ISO performance between them is day and night.

Same argument between 70D and 60D. Both are cropped sensor. 70D a newer camera has better ISO performance than the 60D. Thus the low light capability here has nothing to do with being cropped or full frame. Its the camera internal noise removal capability.

Back to your point where full frame vs cropped sensor low light, yes I agree with you. But the difference is not that extreme as we are talking about 1600 on 60D to 12800 on 6D.

I know. It was a location where the dance floor is another room from the reception. I have my lights mounted on light a stand in the reception room. After finishing the same day edit, I was so tired to move them to another location. Our coverage time was already over so I just shoot some dancing scenes for fun to test the 6D. I think that was my first time I use 6D, last year in Marxh,.

The truth about sensor size and noise artifacts at high ISO is much more complex than "full-frame sensors have better low-light / high-ISO performance."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taky Cheung

...the fact 6D and 5D3 high ISO performance is superior is not because it is full frame. Just compare between 5D2 and 5D3. Both are full frame but the high ISO performance between them is day and night.

Same argument between 70D and 60D. Both are cropped sensor. 70D a newer camera has better ISO performance than the 60D. Thus the low light capability here has nothing to do with being cropped or full frame. Its the camera internal noise removal capability. ...

I'm with Taky on this, and here's more:

The 5D mark 2 is a 21 megapixel sensor
The mark 3 is a 22 megapixel sensor

If you're going to cram more photosites onto a sensor, each will be smaller.

Being smaller, each photosite has less light striking it.. That's right, so far the mark 3 has WORSE low light gathering, but the story is far from over.

The new image processing and general improvements in sensor technology more than overcome the reduced light per photosite challenge. The image processing grows by leaps and bounds from camera model to new cam model from the leading manufacturers. This is where the real magic is happening, in the processing.

It's in the image processing where noise reduction is taking place. On Canons you even have (advanced) menu selections as to the degree of noise processing for stills.

So why isn't the 70D, Canon's latest greatest crop sensor camera as good as the 5Dm3 in low light? Product marketing decisions by Canon. The 70D gets Canon's latest greatest autofocus technology, that's what they think consumers will value highly. The 5dm3 gets the big upgrade in video image processing, that's what they think pros will value highly.

So, while "yes", the crop-sensor cams have generally poorer low-light performance than the full-frames, it's not because of the sensor. It's the marketing decisions that affect how the product lines are differentiated so as to get pros stepping up to the "pro" full-frame cameras.

This may seem like a tedious argument about minutia, but it actually gets pretty important to be clear about this.

Big example: Panasonic is about to ship their apparently stunning new GH4. But darn it, not only is it a crop sensor, it's even smaller than canon's at a 2x crop factor! Must have terrible low-light performance, right? WRONG!!! Through the GH1, 2, and 3, Panasonic has optimized the video performance of their image processing, and has better low-light performance than crowdsourced knowledge about sensor size would suggest.

That "everybody knows crop-sensor cameras have poorer low-light performance" is one of the things that keep recognition of Panny's GH cams low. But it will be interesting to see how the $1700 GH4 compares to the $3500 5Dm3.

Don't get me started on depth-of-focus and the pursuit of filmic imagery...

__________________
30 years of pro media production. Vegas user since 1.0. Webcaster since 1997. Freelancer since 2000. College instructor since 2001.